Nintendo 3DS Early Impressions 273
Now that E3 attendees have had a chance to try out the new revision of Nintendo's portable console, critiques of the 3D effect and updated layout are starting to filter in. Opinion thus far has been mostly positive. Wired writes, "The graphics, which are much more advanced than you’d expect from Nintendo, left me pretty much in disbelief. They're on a level with Sony’s PSP, probably even a little better than that. But the eye-popping 3-D effect makes everything that much richer." According to the Guardian's Games blog, it works "beautifully." They add, "You can perceive 3D only if the console is directly in front of you, but this is fine for handheld gaming. I actually found it pretty adaptable in terms of viewing from different vertical positions. It was much more sensitive if the handheld was turned slightly to the left or right, but really, it coped perfectly with the slight shifts and jerks you'd get on a morning commute." During Shigeru Miyamoto's annual dev roundtable, he explained how Nintendo felt that particular types of games, such as shooters, benefit more from the 3D effect than others, and how Nintendo hopes to update as many older games as they can to incorporate 3D gameplay in addition to 3D graphics.
I see.... (Score:5, Insightful)
An explosion of porn apps for the 3ds.
(ha)
Re: (Score:2)
An explosion of porn apps for the 3ds.
(ha)
"ha"? How about +5 Insightful.
Re: (Score:2)
Ahhh... we've had 3D porn since the days of Commodore. It's blase' now.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
An explosion of porn apps for the 3ds.
No console maker allows AO rated games, and there have been fewer than a dozen M rated games on the DS.
Re: (Score:2)
the NDS has a reasonably active homebrew community
Unless you're talking about WarioWare DIY, Nintendo learned from its security mistake on the DS. Which widely available card should I buy if I want to run DSi-specific homebrew, or even if I want to run DS homebrew on a card that won't become useless after a newly released game forces a System Menu update?
As Avatar was to Movies, 3DS is to games (Score:2, Interesting)
It really was beautiful. This looks to be for games what Avatar was for 3d movies. Unlike the active shutter 3D demos, this one seemed to suffer far less drawbacks. Including, not having to wear expensive shutter glasses.
The effect actually adds a lot to the perception of the game world in most cases, though there are obviously the instances where it seems like a gimic. But even as a gimic, it makes the 3d world feel all that more real.
And the 3D camera is rather impressive too.
Re: (Score:2)
...and with that one analogy, you've killed my interest in the 3DS.
Re: (Score:2)
So, because you didn't like the script or story to the movie, you are going to stick your head in your ass and ignore the fact that it was a movie that is widely regarded as being a great success as far as making an effective 3D presentation and for generating acceptance and enthusiasm for 3D in general?
Even if the film was rubbish, it had a pretty big impact on the industry (for better or worse) and certainly did not fail in eye candy, 3d, or effects departments.
NBA Jam of the 90s vs 2010 (Score:2)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iyw8YGuEEyg [youtube.com]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7bUm4_dyiI4 [youtube.com]
Same exact gameplay. No real graphical improvements. So why is it "3d" and they claim the graphics are "updated", when they aren't? 3d doesn't always make a game more fun or always make the graphics better.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sorry to hear that you're blind, as that's the only way that I can figure that you don't see graphical improvements. Having put plenty of hours into the 90's NBA Jam, I think that this new version appears to have the perfect blend of realism and cartoon-ish feel to really fit what I expect.
Of course the gameplay is basically the same. It wouldn't be NBA Jam if it wasn't. While innovation is great and all, there's certainly something to be said for taking a successful formula, and giving it a little upd
3D because Sony says so (Score:3, Informative)
So why is it "3d"
Because otherwise, Sony wouldn't digitally sign it for booting on the retail console.
Also, because it's more expensive to draw every player in 2D at every angle. NBA Jam on 16-bit systems used a generic basketball player body scaled to about five sizes along with unique character heads. To add a new player, only the head needed to be redrawn at all angles. But now at least the upmarket players expect more than eight angles and numbers on uniforms, and at some point, it becomes easier for the artists just
Few things I thing everyone like to know... (Score:3, Interesting)
Does the 3D screen make the images "pop" out like one of those double concave mirrors or does the image "sink in" so it feels like you look into a box?
And did anyone think to bring a stereo camera and take some photos?
Nintendo may be king of sinking ship? (Score:4, Interesting)
Why buy a dedicated handheld gaming device, when you can get smart phone, pda, or tablet like the iPhone/iTouch/iPad, Zune/WM7, Android, or WebOS device that is just as portable, will do a decent job playing games, plus let you surf the net, do your e-mail, and hold your media (music, videos, etc.)?
If I was in charge of Nintendo, I would put a big chunk of flash in the 3DS, and include a browser, e-mail client, and media player. And also make a smart phone version as well.
Do they really think that people want to carry a separate portable gaming device, media player, and pda or smart phone in this day and age? Especially when you consider that you can buy a low end Zune or iPod Touch 8GB in the same price range as a Nintendo DSi.
Re: (Score:2)
I really, really wanted a port of PalmOS (even one of the old monochrome ones) for my DS - a PDA that you can also play games on... it even looked the part held in "book" aspect - just like an old yuppie filofax. The instant-on suspend mode really lasts, it has an alarm, etc, etc.
DSOrganize (Score:2)
I really, really wanted a port of PalmOS (even one of the old monochrome ones) for my DS - a PDA that you can also play games on
Get a homebrew card for your DS or DS Lite and install DSOrganize and MoonShell.
Re:Nintendo may be king of sinking ship? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
"First of all smart phones (as we in the US know them) are almost non-existant in Japan. "
The iPhone has been here for years and is a major hit. The Sony Ericsson Xperia Android phone is NTT Docomo's best selling phone in recent history. You can also get Windows-based smartphones and Blackberrys, though they're obviously aimed squarely at the suit-and-tie set. And now the iPhone 4 is being heavily preordered while every carrier is coming out with Android models as fast as they can. So no, smsrtphones are no
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I live here and commute every day. I see iPhones - and now, Android phones - every day. Yes, all smartphones combined are just a smaller part of the overall cellphone market; but then, that is the case in the US and Europe as well, all the marketing hype notwithstanding.
Re: (Score:2)
Controlling the game via touch can be a royal pain in the rear.
At times they can, but at times they can't. Case in point, even on the DS: Kirby Canvas Curse and WarioWare Touched/DIY.
Re: (Score:2)
I suspect Nintendo will kick out a phone eventually... about the time people stop buying dedicated handhelds. Side-talkin' FTW!
Re:Nintendo may be king of sinking ship? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Nintendo may be king of sinking ship? (Score:4, Insightful)
Why buy a dedicated handheld gaming device, when you can get smart phone, pda, or tablet like the iPhone/iTouch/iPad, Zune/WM7, Android, or WebOS device that is just as portable, will do a decent job playing games, plus let you surf the net, do your e-mail, and hold your media (music, videos, etc.)?
I've heard that argument before...
Why buy a dedicated iOS tablet, when you can have a fully featured laptop that is just as portable, will let you run Flash, Photoshop...
And yet, iPads sell. So here you are, using the same argument, this time in favor of buying an iPad. People like a simpler, dedicated device, that does more than a "decent job" at the things they want.
Re: (Score:2)
Yepp. The King of a sinking ship that is continuously raking in bizar amounts of revenue, Revenue of which about a 10th would suffice to build a solid golden nuclear sub for the entire Nintendo Mobile division to blast the remains of console competitors like the PSP and its botchjob buddy PSP Go into chunky kibbles.
As long as they have a licence to print money and make money from the first unit sold onward I think Nintendo couldn't care less wether the rest of the world thought that mobile consoles where a
Re:Nintendo may be king of sinking ship? (Score:5, Informative)
Do they really think that people want to carry a separate portable gaming device, media player, and pda or smart phone in this day and age?
Yes, and 130 million DS owners prove it.
Re:Nintendo may be king of sinking ship? (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
I think I'll buy the 3DS, thank you very much.
Re: (Score:2)
Do they really think that people want to carry a separate portable gaming device, media player, and pda or smart phone in this day and age?
Yes, and you would to if you looked at the games currently available for phones.
Re:Nintendo may be king of sinking ship? (Score:5, Insightful)
Why would anyone buy a toaster when they have an oven?
Sometimes you just want a device that does one thing, and does it well.
Re: (Score:2)
Why buy a dedicated handheld gaming device, when you can get smart phone
Because I don't want another $1,440 per two years phone bill. I already have a phone through Virgin Mobile USA, and it costs me $7 per month. To read web pages on the bus, I use the Read It Later extension for Firefox on my netbook and sync when I'm at home or at a restaurant.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Why buy a dedicated handheld gaming device, when you can get smart phone, pda, or tablet like the iPhone/iTouch/iPad, Zune/WM7, Android, or WebOS device that is just as portable, will do a decent job playing games, plus let you surf the net, do your e-mail, and hold your media (music, videos, etc.)?
As an owner of an iPhone, a DS, and a PSP, I can tell you it's because the iPhone isn't so hot at playing games. You'll notice nobody's running around replacing controllers with touch screens. Buttons make a huge difference. Incidentally this didn't help the PSP.
If I was in charge of Nintendo, I would put a big chunk of flash in the 3DS, and include a browser, e-mail client, and media player. And also make a smart phone version as well.
With all due respect, do you really think you can tell Nintendo how to make more money?
Do they really think that people want to carry a separate portable gaming device, media player, and pda or smart phone in this day and age?
This was a bigger concern 5 years ago when anybody needed all those devices. Today my phone is a pda, smart phone, and media player. I have more pocket space
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
So, just so we're all on the same page, you're Sean Maelstrom, right? I mean, I read a couple of those articles, and there's pretty much nothing special or noteworthy about them. I have difficulty seeing how someone could find them so inspiring as to go on this Slashdot campaign to promote them without standing to directly benefit.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You know, I can't help linking to this guy Malstrom's blog.
notrandomly == malstrom?
Rebuy! (Score:4, Interesting)
>"Nintendo hopes to update as many older games as they can to incorporate 3D gameplay in addition to 3D graphics."
So you can buy all your old games yet again!
VHS
DVD
Blueray
Blueray 3D...
Re: (Score:2)
It would be interesting to see if the 3DS is backwards compatible with the DS Lite. Nintendo typically always support the previous generation of consoles.
It would also be interesting to see if playing an older DS game will be interpolated into some sort of pseudo-3D on the 3DS - perhaps with some downloadable modules specific to each game. Not to change the gameplay, but perhaps to just give it a new look and feel.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
screen viewing angle? (Score:4, Funny)
How the fsck do you manage to see the screen when you've turned it completely away from your face?
Re:screen viewing angle? (Score:5, Funny)
The only important question (Score:2)
The Wiser... (Score:5, Insightful)
The wiser people at Microsoft and Sony are pissing themselves right now.
The 3DS is better in literally every stat than the PSP, even the PSPgo. Better graphics, better screen, bigger data files (2GB max at launch opposed to 1.8GB UMDs), better input (analog stick, dpad, AND touch), better everything.
Nintendo spent a time with weaker graphics to perfect a "gimmick", and once it became cheap to increase the graphics, did.
Meanwhile, on the "big boy stage", both of the other big 3 are busy trying to desperately imitate the "gimmick" of motion control that they spent the past few years mocking Nintendo for doing. Meanwhile, Nintendo's perfecting it.
It's cheap, from an IP standpoint, to add more graphical power. You don't really need to research it, for example.
And now, it's cheap from a hardware standpoint, too.
That 8 bit chiptune version of the Jaws Theme you hear is Nintendo, stalking Sony and Microsoft's lunch.
The Wii3D or whatever their next console is going to be is going to do the same thing the 3DS did to the PSP, to the PS3 and the 360. Take a gimmick they have perfected, perhaps add another gimmick, but increase the graphics and remove the one advantage the other two have.
Re: (Score:2)
As I understand it... Sony now has 3D TV support on the PS3. In effect, Sony has beaten everyone else to market on this. Of course, from what I understand, only one company makes 3D TVs at this point... Sony [sony.net].
Also, it only works with cert
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Meanwhile, on the "big boy stage", both of the other big 3 are busy trying to desperately imitate the "gimmick" of motion control that they spent the past few years mocking Nintendo for doing. Meanwhile, Nintendo's perfecting it.
While I think, yes, to a large degree, kinetic and move are trying to cash in on the same thing that's propelling the wii, and move is clearly a blatant ripoff, I don't think Nintendo's really "perfecting it". I haven't seen any games that really use the motion controls for much. It's been 4 years, and still the best games on the system only use it for "shake the controller and that will do something that we could have put as a button push if we had more buttons to work with." Move is said to be more sen
Re: (Score:2)
[]remove the one advantage the other two have.
That's going to be easy, since the two are just copying the Wii right now.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I have no interest in a Wii3D, but a WiiHD would be very nice. I've enjoyed Wario Shake It, Paper Mario and Wii Sports Resort. I'll get New Super Mario Bros Wii when the price drops a bit. My wife has beat every Lego Movie game (both Star Wars, both Indiana Jones, Batman ...). In all, we have nearly 30 games and I think only the Coraline one has been played less than 5 hours. My 6 year old daughter has enjoyed several kiddie games
The same Sony that ruthlessly killed Sega? (Score:5, Interesting)
I say it's payback. Sony came into the gaming world with little to no respect for developers or the gaming community as a whole. Sony put the focus in on the 3d, and the specs, and the commercialism that we come to expect in the gaming world of today. The gaming world of yesterday had an entirely different ecosphere which in my opinion was better for the developer and the gamers. The gaming industry used to be able making quality games, fun games, which may not have been 3d but which were much more fun because they weren't.
Look at Mortal Kombat and the NBA Jam series. These games were never supposed to be 3d and never were as good when forced into 3d. The graphics actually looked photorealistic when they were 2d and the games were more fun as 2d, so why were these series forced into 3d? Sony had a policy where if your game wasn't 3d they didn't want to let you release it. This is why starting with the PSX and really with the PS2 we saw the death of all 2d gaming, even revolutionary 2d technologies which had photorealistic graphics, because Sony wanted to use their formula of hardware over software.
Now their formula isn't working anymore. Good hardware can only take you so far and we are once again entering into an era where games are supposed to be fun again. I think if Sony were to leave the gaming industry alone on the software level and just make hardware we'd all be better off. Sony has no business making software and no real understanding of the gaming industry as Sony is a hardware company. Perhaps it's time for Sony to follow Sega and move on to specialize in what they are good at, and thats making gaming computers, chips, graphics engines and other hardware components to be used by Nintendo or Microsoft.
Re:The same Sony that ruthlessly killed Sega? (Score:5, Insightful)
little to no respect for developers
Bullshit. Sony entered the market when Sega was trying to sell people on a hacked-together dual-CPU console even Sega struggled to develop for, while Nintendo was fucking about with a drifting launch date nobody could schedule for and hefty licencing fees. Sony offered the developers a console with extensive libraries, comprehensible hardware, and a due date that publishers could actually rely on. They made a system developers would want to work with. They were able to snatch the market from Nintendo and Sega because they had much, much more respect from developers than anyone else at the time.
Ironically having taught Nintendo and Sega that lesson, leading to a Dreamcast and GameCube that were very coder-friendly they completely forgot about it when the PS2 rolled around, with predictable consequences.
Eh what? (Score:2)
The predictable consequence that the gamecube and dreamcast failed and the PS2 still sells?
Oh poor Sony, how will they ever survive the PS2!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
They gave both Nintendo and newcomer Microsoft a great opportunity to grab a sales niche and publisher and developer support. I doubt we'd be looking at a three-horse race this generation if Sony had its shit together on the PS2.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Buh? I'm not sure how many more than 140 million consoles Sony could have sold if they'd "had [their] shit together on the PS2". Microsoft's entry into the market with the Xbox was through the sacrificing of roughly $1.5 billion, and the Gamecube was more or less a non-event until the same hardware was repackaged as the Wii.
The reason it's a 3 horse race at the moment is because Sony cocked up with a late delivered and needlessly complex PS3 coming up against a "good enough" Wii and the Xbox 360 taking the
Re:Eh what? (Score:5, Insightful)
The predictable consequence that the gamecube and dreamcast failed and the PS2 still sells?
The GameCube did not fail. It made plenty of money for Nintendo, and then it got a clock speed upgrade and a Bluetooth receiver and became the disruptive Wii. Dreamcast, on the other hand, was FUDded to death by Sony.
Re: (Score:2)
with predictable consequences.
The largest selling console figures ever?
Re: (Score:2)
little to no respect for developers
Bullshit. Sony entered the market when Sega was trying to sell people on a hacked-together dual-CPU console even Sega struggled to develop for, while Nintendo was fucking about with a drifting launch date nobody could schedule for and hefty licencing fees. Sony offered the developers a console with extensive libraries, comprehensible hardware, and a due date that publishers could actually rely on. They made a system developers would want to work with. They were able to snatch the market from Nintendo and Sega because they had much, much more respect from developers than anyone else at the time.
Ironically having taught Nintendo and Sega that lesson, leading to a Dreamcast and GameCube that were very coder-friendly they completely forgot about it when the PS2 rolled around, with predictable consequences.
The Saturn was not a bad console. It's hardware was on par with the PSX. The reason the PSX beat it is because it was easier to develop for so I'll give you that. PSX had good timing and a good price.
PS2 didn't have a better price than the Dreamcast or the Gamecube. It also didn't have better hardware than the Dreamcast or the Gamecube. So while you can say Sony legitimately beat Sega and Nintendo with the PSX, they did not genuinely beat Sega or Nintendo in the hardware or software with the PS2.
My point st
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
If you honestly think that games, today, are ruined, I don't know what I can possibly say to you. My tastes run more towards Mario World than Halo, but I can honestly say I'd rather be a gamer in this generation than any other.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The Saturn was not a bad console. It's hardware was on par with the PSX. The reason the PSX beat it is because it was easier to develop for so I'll give you that. PSX had good timing and a good price.
The PS1 (The development name for the original Playstation console, "PSX", has been reused as the name of a product, a PS2 with integrated DVR, and it should no longer be used to describe the PS1 both for this reason and since Sony hasn't called it PSX since release) had hardware transparency and the Saturn didn't, so you had to do it manually by using the second CPU for graphics. That's how Panzer Dragoon Saga did their water transparency effects, and they still weren't very good. The Saturn thus has infer
Re:The same Sony that ruthlessly killed Sega? (Score:5, Insightful)
When the PS2 launched, it had a few extra features over the Dreamcast, which was the only console of that generation out at the time. The first was backwards compatibility; it could play the entirety of the (large) PS1 library of games. The second was the ability to play movie DVDs. The third was 3rd party support, whom had left Nintendo (due to Nintendo's decision to use 16-64MB carts as opposed to 700MB CDs) and Sega (not sure why they left Sega, but looking at the Saturn library, it's clear they did) during the previous generation.
The PS3 might have done well in the current generation... but Microsoft, despite being a relative newcomer to the scene, released the Xbox 360 a year before it... and say what you will about Microsoft, the 360 had an extremely impressive showing. The PS3 has been trying to play catch-up with the 360 ever since. Sony was banking on PS2 compatibility and Blu-Ray movie support to sell more units than it actually did. However, even those two features combined couldn't save the PS3 from its largest, most glaring mistake: its price tag. The 60GB model cost twice as much as the PS2 did at launch ($600 vs $300), and six times the cost of a Slim PS2 at the time. DVD was a revolutionary step in video playback. Blu-Ray is an evolutionary step in video playback... it's really just a higher capacity DVD. Four years out, we're finally starting to see games where Blu-Ray discs make a difference, most notably Final Fantasy XIII.
Meanwhile, Nintendo aimed at the casual market... and succeeded beyond their wildest dreams. The low price point helped considerably; from memory, around the time the PS3/Wii launched, prices were: Wii $249, PS3: $499/$599, Xbox 360: $399/$499)
The PS3 had another problem (Score:4, Interesting)
An extremely stupid design, that being the Cell. Not that there was necessarily anything wrong with the idea of a processors like that, but that the design was new, unproven, and unknown. You do not put a brand new, first gen architecture like that in a consumer product. IBM was using it for PCIe boards for research and toying with it in some servers, not going mass market with it. Also, you'll note, IBM decided that it was a failed experiment, they aren't going to continue development. Not the sort of thing to put in a consumer device.
However it gets worse. Sony had somehow talked themselves in to the fact that the Cell would be good enough for 3D graphics. Originally it was not to be the CPU, it was to be the GPU. I don't know if they just had really bad numbers or if they were willfully ignorant to the fact that GPUs did the kind of math graphics need way better than the Cell could (though the Cell is better at them than a normal CPU). Well, this became apparent and Sony did the stupid thing of making the Cell the CPU, rather than scrapping it for a PPC CPU.
Now they needed a graphics chip, so they went to nVidia. Problem was, they were late. It takes a long time to do design of hardware. The hardware that you see coming out today has been in the pipe for years, you can't just change it all at the last second. So what nVidia could offer them was a slightly modified version of their next gen computer chipset, the 7900 series. They couldn't do the full customization you want for a console in the time they had. As such the PS3 got a graphics chip not as suited for console use as it would have had they contracted it in the beginning. A major feature you can note in this regard is divided CPU/GPU RAM. You don't want that in a console since RAM is at a premium. When you've got only 512MB, you want it all unified. However nVidia couldn't redesign the RAM controller in the time provided so the PS3 has to operate as 256MB/256MB which means in many cases not as much RAM for high detail textures and so on.
It was just a poor series of design choices all around. In the end it was not only expensive, but hard to program for. Xbox 360 titles were being developed in Visual Studio, something developers have vast experience with and going from PC to 360 was almost as simple as clicking a cross compile button. The PS3 had poor tools and nobody understood how to use it. The Cell might have a lot of untapped power, but there was no knowledge base on how to program to access that.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Funny how people perceive the past with a distorted view.
I loved the NES and the SNES but the fact is that Nintendo tactics during those days where really bullish against developers. Just the "if you release for NES you can't release for another console" shit was completely insane.
Fortunately healthy competition has brought a lot of options today. Back in my day it was either the Nintendo or the Sega. All the others (Turbo Graphics 16, NeoGeo,etc) where completely out of the selection. Right now with the sa
Sega died because they were batshit crazy (Score:2)
I should clarify the Sonic thing (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Sony put the focus in on the 3d, and the specs
Whereas Nintendo are putting the focus on 3D - *without the specs* :-)
Re: (Score:2)
I say it's payback. Sony came into the gaming world with little to no respect for developers or the gaming community as a whole. Sony put the focus in on the 3d, and the specs, and the commercialism that we come to expect in the gaming world of today. The gaming world of yesterday had an entirely different ecosphere which in my opinion was better for the developer and the gamers. The gaming industry used to be able making quality games, fun games, which may not have been 3d but which were much more fun because they weren't
But Nintendo respected the gamer. Nintendo did use bullying tactics but then again they respected the gamer and the gaming community. Sony does not and has never respected the gaming community.
This is nothing but bitterness and misguided nostalgia.
Off the top of my head Nintendo were the first ones to use various bullying tactics to get their own way in the videogaming marketplace and had no respect for anyone or anything other than their profits.
As for those who say that the gaming industry used to about making fun games can any of you point to when this changed? After all, ET and Pac Man for the Atari 2600 were appalling cash-ins and the likes of the Commodore 64 were awash with legions of horrendously bad games.
Nintendo may have used bullying tactics but Nintendo respected the gamer and the gaming community. Sony has never respected the gamer or the gaming community and only has ever cared about profits. The quality of their games never mattered, the quality of their hardware never mattered with overheating issues and other nonsense.
Re:Nintendo is destroying Sony? (Score:4, Insightful)
Just responding because your post is remarkably offputting if the intention was to refer us to this site.
Re:Nintendo is destroying Sony? (Score:5, Insightful)
Not "causal", "casual". He's attempting to characterise the supposed hardcore-casual gamer dichotomy as being a fallacy, something I'm inclined to agree with a priori.
Re: (Score:2)
So he's saying the hardcore-casual gamer distinction is mistaken, how boring..
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Nintendo is destroying Sony? (Score:4, Insightful)
Non-trivial arguments about the real world aren't simple enough to apply logical rules to, and mistakes in logic are easier to recognize by pointing them out with respect to the specific case, rather than by the generalized case.
The idea that you can define a set of axioms and predicates and use rules of inference to prove that the 3DS is an attempt to "destroy" Sony, or something else in a real-world debate, is really crazy, so I don't think concepts from hard-nosed logic and proof are actually useful.
Also people all too often refer to "fallacy" like a fancy word for "mistake" (see the response before this one "a priori"), or to dismiss someone's argument in an intentionally inaccessible way, which comes across like condescending nonsense.
Mainly it's too often used to turn the vocab of logic and proof into an underhanded debating tactic, which seems like the opposite of what it's supposed to be for.
Re:Nintendo is destroying Sony? (Score:4, Funny)
Mainly it's too often used to turn the vocab of logic and proof into an underhanded debating tactic, which seems like the opposite of what it's supposed to be for.
Ah, you've fallen prey to the fallacy of the unbounded middle.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Apparently people at Nintendo are reading his blog, because Nintendo's strategy seems to go in the direction Malstrom points :)
I'm pretty sure the Wii came out before his blog started, and that Nintendo/Sega have been into more casual mini-game style games for a lot longer than the Wii. Saying a blog has "opened your eyes" makes it sound more like you are easily brainwashed.
You know it's quite possible for lots of different types of games to co-exist in the world? Same goes for pretty much everything else in life. You don't always have to artificially split everything into two polar opposites and gather yourself to one side of it.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It would suck if Sony's game division actually did get destroyed because Nintendo (and everyone, really) needs the competition to get off their behinds. Article was really interesting, thanks for pointing that out! The first thing I noticed while reading is the user happiness vs. featuritis curve made me think of Apple immediately. They seem to think on the same level as Nintendo in this sense.
Makes me wonder if the two will cooperate on the patents and Apple will have a 3D phone next year? The one pers
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
This guy has some points, but he misses some important ones.
Yes, most developers today think "casual" is a synonymous for "retard". Casual games = games for retards. And they produce games only retards want to play, and are surprised why they missed the huge casual market.
But worse than that, passionate developers create an awesome hardcore game. Then the marketing team looks at it and says "But... but it's too difficult for casuals(=retards). You must make it easier. Remove that confusing weapon system. Re
Re:Nintendo is destroying Sony? (Score:5, Interesting)
There was concern that video games were running full speed into a dead end and there wasn't anything anybody could do about it. At the time there really wasn't such thing as a 'casual gamer', you either played games or you didn't. And those who played games were demanding ever increasing realistic graphics, massive games, orchestrated music and rendered cutscenes. Basically for most gamers to be satisfied a game would have to cost increasing millions in development costs. It was becoming tougher and tougher to develop a game that would make a profit unless you were one of the big guys developing the next sequel. And eventually even they would have to deal with the issue too.
The big problem was that the number of people in the gaming market wasn't really increasing. Part of this he guessed was the result of these bigger and more impressive games requiring newer, more complex and more expensive hardware that scared a lot of people away from gaming.
With this soon to be unsustainable trend, him and his colleagues guessed that the gaming industry would collapse in as little as 5 to 10 years unless something drastic happened. He had even started sharpening his skills in other areas in the event he would have to jump ship.
At one point there was some hope for the Game Cube. Nintendo had attempted to bring in new gamers with its less intimidating system and if it had worked would have provided developers with a more profitable system to create games for. The more casual gamers brought in by the Game Cube would haven't had the same demands as traditional gamers in terms of graphics and power and could have reduced the financial strain involved with creating the blockbusters that hardcore gamers were expecting. Unfortunately it failed. Traditional gamers shunned the system for its family friendly style and Nintendo was never really able to sell it to the families well enough to create the influx of casual gamers they were hoping to get.
When the GameCube failed there were some in the industry that were getting ready to pack their bags, and I'm sure a collective sigh a relief when the Wii managed to succeed where the GC could not. With an influx of new gamers whose only demand for a game that it be fun, the industry is healthier than it has ever been. A few years ago there were huge portions of the population who wouldn't have been able to pick up a video game without their friends turning their nose up at them. Now it's socially acceptable for almost anyone to play video games. We're now seeing scores of games that are relying more upon innovation and fun and less on graphical power and it's changing the industry from the bottom up.
If Sony killed the video game industry with the PS2, then Nintendo revived it with the Wii.
Maybe not just Nintendo (Score:2)
Re:Nintendo is destroying Sony? (Score:4, Interesting)
You sound like someone whose gone through the twelve step program. Sorry, your choice of words just creeps me out.
Re: (Score:2)
Why do you need someone else to tell you what to like and what to not like?
Sheep much?
I like hardcore games and I like casual games, the two aren't mutually exclusive. I've got a rig that will pump out 60fps in Crysis at 1920x1200 and play Starcraft II in all it's glory. I also end up playing the crap out of casual games on my iPad/EVO.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Same here. I've played FPS, MMOs, RTS pretty hardcore over the years, even been in competition teams, yet I still love my casual games. Anyone who suddenly changes their likes for a blog is a fairly shallow person indeed.
I'd say that the GP is the person who's blog they're trying to promote. This Sean person seems like someone who has never been good at games, but likes them. Nothing wrong with that, but you don't have to rag on the hardcore gaming market just to compensate.
Anyway, OT this should be so... 3
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Nintendo is destroying Sony? (Score:5, Interesting)
I did read through Malstrom's explanation of Nintendo's "Disruption" strategy, and found it quite eye-opening.
However, I'm afraid I'll have to disagree with you on the hardcore's reaction to NSMBW. Although you may have described the reaction of a portion of the hardcore, all the "hardcore" gamers who I know actually enjoyed NSMBW a lot, praising the way Nintendo wasn't afraid to put in difficult levels, and the way that the multiplayer "co-op" could be easily played competitively, with all the players trying to throw each other off ledges/push them into lava/jump off each others heads. The hardcore is not opposed to 2D gameplay - see the success of Street Fighter IV compared to other 3D fighting games.
This is part of Nintendo's genius -- NSMBW caters to a wide slice of the market.
Re:Nintendo is destroying Sony? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
>>>Notice how New Super Mario Bros. Wii was dismissed by the hardcore?
Those of us who are TRUE hardcore gamers (since the 70s and 80s) recognize those 2D games are the true heart of gaming. Easy to Play; Hard to Master.
It's the 40-50 hour snorefests that are the opposite of fun. Sure long games have a place, like with the Final Fantasy series, but a lot of game companies "pad" their games simply to brag "50 hours of gameplay". An example of this is Zelda Wind Waker. I personally don't like the
Re: (Score:2)
>>>I used to be a "hardcore", and then someone linked to Malstrom's blog. Now I basically hate the hardcore
Why? What's wrong with hardcore gaming? - As for Nintendo I bet a lot of the workers are secretly pleased they beat Sony. It's like payback for Sony stealing Nintendo's 10-year-dominance at #1. Of course it was partly Nintendo's fault - they told Sony to develop a CD addon for the Super Nintendo and then reneged on the contract. So rather than throw-away all their work, Sony turned the
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
It seems like bullshit to me. Establishing 3d on hand helds hardly "destroys" Sony's push for 3D on consoles. If anything it helps establish 3D as a standard part of the gaming experience and supports Sony's push.
The lack of glasses is irrelevant as it's a technology that's only really applicable to handhelds due to the viewing restraints.
Re:Why the 3DS is relevant here (Score:4, Insightful)
Sony itself will destroy Sony.
That is, the films and music divisions of Sony are impairing the technology divisions of the company, and there's no clear way out of that mess.
Re: (Score:2)
The point is that the industry goes through phases and Nintendo is pretty much the last man standing from the 80s. Definitely the only ones still producing hardware.
Re:Why the 3DS is relevant here (Score:5, Informative)
Story time!
Sega got its start [wikipedia.org] in 1940, to provide coin-operated games for the American military to put on their bases. They were, quite literally, a child born out of World War II. While they had their ups and downs, they never really encountered any serious business success problems until the 90's.
Nintendo, on the other hand, got it's start in 1889 as a playing card company [wikipedia.org]. By the time Sega came around, Nintendo was already a granola chomper looking for its mid-life crisis convertible. They had a taxi company, a hotel chain, a tv network, a food company...and they all failed horribly. Nintendo brought itself back from having only 60 yen in stocks. I don't think Sackboy and a few Helghast are going to be much of a problem.
Re: (Score:2)
Nintendo brought itself back from having only 60 yen in stocks. I don't think Sackboy and a few Helghast are going to be much of a problem.
That may be, but the people who did that are long since retired or dead, and accomplished this feat in a very different world. Having a track record does not make you invincible. Nintendo will probably be in no danger of failing as long as they keep that in mind. Thinking you're a great company because of what you did in the past is a good way to fail quickly.
Re: (Score:2)
True, those people are likely dead and gone...but it's inspiring to know that the company has been in a tight spot and has made it out before. I would imagine that, given the history of the company, the people currently in charge of Nintendo keep what their forebears did in mind.
The fact that they are Japanese makes this even more likely.
Re: (Score:2, Redundant)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Because Apple has computers, notebooks, OS, and a lot of the likes that produce enough profit to let the company subsidize iPod and survive the siege, had the need ever arisen. Sony could have kept its domination on portable music player market, at great cost, but it would not destroy Apple. And Apple could strike again the moment Sony tries to make a profit from that market.
Re:Nintendo is destroying Sony? (Score:4, Interesting)
According to the all-knowing Wiki, they've been doing it since 1889. I think Nintendo know how to stay in business. That's the problem really - people think that "big" means "stable". It isn't necessarily true at all, as the latest economic crises have demonstrated. Neither does age make a good company, though, (Woolworths were trading back before Nintendo and yet went bust recently). The question is not even what divisions they serve, or the investment they make - it's how many people want to buy their products. I think Nintendo have *always* had a better grasp of the games market than any other company and they have outlasted EVERYONE, because they understand the market better than anyone. There is barely a person in the US/UK that doesn't recognise and/or hasn't owned a Nintendo device of some kind, and that was true even when I was a kid. Sony, by comparison, are a relative upstart in the gaming arena (company started in the 1950's and is widely spread across dozens of markets, not just the videogaming one - that didn't start until about 1994 with the Playstation). Even SEGA couldn't compete long enough to make a dent, and at one time the gaming market *WAS* Sega and Nintendo.
Nintendo are much more powerful and far richer than you think. Every Wii sold made profit on the hardware, and the games, and the accessories. There's not many companies about today in the video games console market that can say the same thing. Almost every major console or handheld that they've ever produced has been an enormous hit - the only exception that comes to mind is the VirtualBoy which seemed merely badly timed in terms of the technology they had to hand for production. Hell, a crappy game that had been around for decades, was released with the Gameboy and was turned into an overnight success that not much else can touch in comparative terms. Nintendo are no fools. And the markets will release three, four, five new products that will do well enough but not spectacularly. And then Nintendo will reveal something else that nobody thought of / dared release / believed possible.
If anything, I'm slightly disappointed at Nintendo for just jumping on the 3D bandwagon, but it has the taste of "Well, we had this prototype sitting in a dusty cupboard for years and people seem to be on a 3D hype at the moment... see how well you can sell that while we do the real work back here"
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)